Recent rhetorical studies in public understanding of science: Multiple purposes and strengths

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 386-400

  Condit, Celeste M ^a   Lynch, John ^b   Winderman, Emily ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

Author keywords

discourses of science; governance of science and technology; interaction experts publics; lay expertise; public understanding of science; representations of science; science and popular culture; science communication; scientific controversies; studies of science and technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861830271     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662512437330     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Banning ME.When poststructural theory and contemporary politics collide: The vexed case of global warming.Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies. 2009;6 (3): 285-304.
2. Bass J.Hearts of darkness and hot zones: The ideologeme of imperial contagion in recent accounts of viral outbreaks.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 1998;84 (4): 430-447.
3. Bennett JA.Passing, protesting, and the arts of resistance: Infiltrating the ritual space of blood donation.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2008;94 (1): 23-43.
4. Brock BL,Scott RL,Chesebro JWMethods of Rhetorical Criticism: A Twentieth-Century Perspective. 1989) Methods of Rhetorical Criticism: A Twentieth-Century Perspective, 3rd edn, revised. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Detroit: Wayne State University Press; 1989:.
5. Burgchardt CReadings in Rhetorical Criticism. 2010) Readings in Rhetorical Criticism, 4th edn.State College, PA: Strata Publishing.State College, PA: Strata Publishing; 2010:.
6. Ceccarelli L.Manufactured scientific controversy: Science, rhetoric, and public debate.Rhetoric & Public Affairs. 2011;14 (2): 195-228.
7. Condit CM.How culture and science make race "genetic": Motives and strategies for discrete categorization of the continuous and heterogeneous.Literature and Medicine. 2007;26 (1): 240-268.
8. Constantinides H.The duality of scientific ethos: Deep and surface structures.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2001;87 (1): 61-72.
9. Crick N,Gabriel J.The conduit between lifeworld and system: Habermas and the rhetoric of public scientific controversies.Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 2010;40 (3): 201-223.
10. Ding H.Rhetorics of alternative media in an emerging epidemic: SARS, censorship, and extra-institutional risk communication.Technical Communication Quarterly. 2009;18 (4): 327-350.
11. Douglas RM.The green backlash: Scepticism or scientism?.Social Epistemology. 2009;23 (2): 145-163.
12. Dyehouse J."A textbook case revisited": Visual rhetoric and series patterning in the American Museum of Natural History's horse evolution displays.Technical Communication Quarterly. 2011;20 (3): 327-346.
13. Endres D.The rhetoric of nuclear colonialism: Rhetorical exclusion of American Indian arguments in the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste siting decision.Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies. 2009;6 (1): 39-60.
14. Evans R,Kotchetkova I,Langer S.Just around the corner: Rhetorics of progress and promise in genetic research.Public Understanding of Science. 2009;18 (1): 43-59.
15. Fleming C,Goodall J.Dangerous Darwinism.Public Understanding of Science. 2002;11 (3): 259-271.
16. Gronnvoll M,Landau J.From viruses to Russian roulette to dance: A rhetorical critique and creation of genetic metaphors.RSQ: Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 2010;40 (1): 46-70.
17. Gross AG.The roles of rhetoric in the public understanding of science.Public Understanding of Science. 1994;3 (1): 3-23.
18. Happe KE.Heredity, gender and the discourse of ovarian cancer.New Genetics and Society. 2006a;25 (2): 171-196.
19. Happe KE.The rhetoric of race in breast cancer research.Patterns of Prejudice. 2006b;40 (4-5): 461-480.
20. Hass B,Kleine M.The rhetoric of junk science.Technical Communication Quarterly. 2003;12 (3): 267-284.
21. Jack J.Lydia J. Roberts' nutrition research and the rhetoric of "democratic" science.College Composition and Communication. 2009;61 (1): 109-129.
22. Jensen RE.Using science to argue for sexual education in U.S. public schools.Science Communication. 2007;29 (2): 217-241.
23. Johnson D.Selling Sarafem: Priestly and bardic discourses in the construction of premenstrual syndrome.Women's Studies in Communication. 2004;27:331-351.
24. Johnson D.Dawkins' myth: The religious dominance of evolutionary discourse.Journal of Communication and Religion. 2006;29:285-314.
25. Johnson D.Psychiatric power: The post-museum as a site of rhetorical alignment.Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies. 2008;5 (4): 344-362.
26. Jordan JW.The rhetorical limits of the "plastic body".Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2004;90 (3): 327-358.
27. Jordan JW.Reshaping the "pillow angel": Plastic bodies and the rhetoric of normal surgical solutions.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2009;95 (1): 20-42.
28. Keränen L.Mapping misconduct: Demarcating legitimate science from "fraud" in the B-06 lumpectomy controversy.Argumentation and Advocacy. 2005;42 (2): 94-113.
29. Koerber A,Arnett EJ,Cumbie T.Distortion and the politics of pain relief: A Habermasian analysis of medicine in the media.Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 2008;22 (3): 364-391.
30. Koteyko N,Thelwall M,Nerlich B.From carbon markets to carbon morality: Creative compounds as framing devices in online discourses on climate change mitigation.Science Communication. 2010;32 (1): 25-54.
31. Kuypers J.From science, moral-poetics: Dr. James Dobson's response to the fetal tissue research initiative.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2000;86 (2): 146-167.
32. Larson BM,Nerlich B,Wallis P.Metaphors and biorisks: The war on infectious diseases and invasive species.Science Communication. 2005;26 (3): 243-268.
33. Lessl TM.The Galileo legend as scientific folklore.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 1999;85 (2): 146-168.
34. Lessl TM.Gnostic scientism and the prohibition of questions.Rhetoric & Public Affairs. 2002;5 (1): 133-157.
35. Lessl TM.The culture of science and the rhetoric of scientism: From Francis Bacon to the Darwin fish.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2007;93 (2): 123-149.
36. Littlefield M.Constructing the organ of deceit: The rhetoric of fMRI and brain fingerprinting in post-9/11 America.Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2009;34 (3): 365-392.
37. Lopez JJ.Notes on metaphors, notes as metaphors: The genome as musical spectacle.Science Communication. 2007;29 (1): 7-34.
38. Lynch JA.Articulating scientific practice: Understanding Dean Hamer's "gay gene" study as overlapping material, social, and rhetorical registers.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2009;95 (4): 435-456.
39. McClure K.Resurrecting the narrative paradigm: Identification and the case of young earth creationism.Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 2009;39 (2): 189-211.
40. Mechling EW,Mechling J.The atom according to Disney.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 1995;81 (4): 436-453.
41. Nerlich B,James R."The post-antibiotic apocalypse" and the "war on superbugs": Catastrophe discourse in microbiology, its rhetorical form and political function.Public Understanding of Science. 2009;18 (5): 574-590.
42. Park HJ.The creation-evolution debate: Carving creationism in the public mind.Public Understanding of Science. 2001;10 (2): 173-186.
43. Paroske M.Deliberating international science policy controversies: Uncertainty and AIDS in South Africa.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2009;95 (2): 148-170.
44. Paul D.Spreading chaos.Written Communication. 2004;21 (1): 32-68.
45. Ratto M.Foundations and profiles: Splicing metaphors in genetic databases and biobanks.Public Understanding of Science. 2006;15 (1): 31-53.
46. Reeves C.Rhetoric and the AIDS virus hunt.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 1998;84 (1): 1-22.
47. Scott JB.The public policy debate over newborn HIV testing: A case study of the knowledge enthymeme.Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 2002;32 (2): 57-84.
48. Sidler M,Jones N.Genetics interfaces: Representing science and enacting public discourse in online spaces.Technical Communication Quarterly. 2008;18 (1): 28-48.
49. Skinner C."She will have science": Ethos and audience in Mary Gove's lectures to ladies.Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 2009;39 (3): 240-259.
50. Spoel P,Goforth D,Cheu H,Pearson D.Public communication of climate change science: Engaging citizens through apocalyptic narrative explanation.Technical Communication Quarterly. 2008;18 (1): 49-81.
51. Tillery D.Radioactive waste and technical doubts: Genre and environmental opposition to nuclear waste sites.Technical Communication Quarterly. 2003;12 (4): 405-421.
52. Väliverronen E,Hellsten I.From "burning library" to "green medicine": The role of metaphors in communicating biodiversity.Science Communication. 2002;24 (2): 229-245.
53. Wander PC.The rhetoric of science.Western Speech Communication. 1976;40 (4): 226-235.
54. Xiao X.China encounters Darwinism: A case of intercultural rhetoric.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 1995;81 (1): 83-99.
55. Xiao X.The 1923 scientistic campaign and Dao-discourse: A cross-cultural study of the rhetoric of science.Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2004;90 (4): 469-492.